Dossier of Jesus (part 1.1)

October 18, 2009 at 1:52 pm (Jesus's true dossier, theories on Jesus's parents, Uncategorized)

Some updates to part 1.

Other notable facts:

  1. There are some suggestions that the heritage claims in Luke 3:23-38 were actually that of Mary. Mary’s parents’ names were St. Anne and St. Joachim according to the Gospel of the Birth of Mary.
  2. Eight days after his birth, he was officially given his name and was circumcised.
  3. Not only can Rabbis get married, but they are required to get married. Therefore, it is strongly probable that Jesus did in fact get married. “Be fruitful and multiply” is the commandment that every Jew is required to fulfill.
Advertisements

Permalink 3 Comments

Yet another Jesus theory

October 18, 2009 at 1:33 pm (Christ myth theories, theories on Jesus's parents)

From http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/…541bae7d09351c:

There was a real Jesus, but the reason nobody can find him in the historical record, is that nobody wants to. The reason? Well, they are too embarrassed, because the historical Jesus was not the character they wanted to find.

1. Jesus was royal. We know this, because that is what ‘Christ’ and ‘Messiah’ mean – king.

2. Jesus was rich. The Talmud says that Mary bought Jesus’ high-priesthood of the Temple of Jerusalem using some 400kg of silver denari.

3. Jesus a high priest? Surely not. Well, his appointment as high priest is given in Hebrews 7, and confirmed in the Talmud.

4. Jesus was also a king (without a throne), who fomented revolution in order to get his throne. We know this because the NT says so. All the disciples were armed with swords, and Jesus said:

… a. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
… For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her
… mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Mt 10:34

… b. Jesus said, but those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them,
… bring here, and kill them in front of me. Lu 19: 27

Ouch. Not exactly the meek and mild saviour of the local pulpit. Note in b., that Jesus assumes he is a king.

So, if Jesus was a wealthy royal, who tried to take over the Roman East, then why cannot we find him in the historical record? Well, actually we can. We know all about him – if you don’t mind what you find.

Jesus was actually the leader of the Fourth Sect of Judaism, as recorded by Josephus. The Fourth sect was a revolutionary sect closely allied to the Essene, and its rules and actions were rather similar to the gospel stories. And their leader? Well, he was Jesus, of course – Jesus of Gamala – a real historical character that we know a great deal about. It was Jesus of Gamala who became High Priest of Jerusalem, just as Hebrews 7 relates.

But if the biblical Jesus was Jesus of Gamala, then how does this change the story? Well, it was a revolution – a royal revolution. The following is from the historical texts.

a. The Fourth Sect were the ‘Babylonian Jews’ who had came from Persia in about AD4 ish.

b. That is why the Persian Magi, the Persian kingmakers (the three wise men) were interested in Jesus’ birth.

c. The eastern lands the Fourth Sect occupied (in Jordan and Syria) became known as Ourania (the Huran). Translated into English, this was the Kingdom of Heaven.

d. JC’s mother was called Thea. So Jesus was, in English, the Son of God. All Egyptian pharaohs were the son of one god or another, and Jesus was often called the Egyptian False Prophet (his maternal descent was Egyptian). His mother was regarded as an incarnation of Isis, which is why we see the ubiquitous Madonna and child imagery (Isis and Horus).

e. Jesus of Gamala married Mary (the Magdalene). The Talmud describes Mary as the richest woman in Judaea, who owned a palace next to the Temple of Jerusalem. Now there is a different story for you.

f. At their wedding, Jesus used a trick water-to-wine jug, invented by Hero of Alexandria. This was typical of royal courts of this era, who liked to entertain their guests with such tricks. This trick was taken as an article of faith by the Catholic Church – a proof of Jesus divinity!! (John 2:7) But water-to-wine was a well-known party trick:
http://www.history.rochester.edu/ste…section18.html
http://www.history.rochester.edu/ste…section26.html
http://www.history.rochester.edu/ste…section59.html
(and as one wit remarked – ‘I can turn wine into water, is that a miracle?’)

g. Jesus of Gamala became governor of Tiberias in Galilee (as well as Ourania). He was in charge of 600 cavalry – the traditional army of the Babylonian Jews, who Herod was using to guard his eastern borders.

h. The Fourth Sect and their great army stirred up trouble in Judaea, and was responsible (according to Josephus) for the Jewish Civil War that ended in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

So how did this great royal and theological revolution become transformed into a story of peace and love?

Well, the New Testament was not written by the Church of Jesus and James (the Fourth Sect), it was written by Saul (St Paul). Saul had set up his own rival Church, the Church of the Gentiles, or Simple Judaism as I call it.

Saul was jailed by the Jews for teachings incompatible with Judaism, but Rome saw this as an opportunity. The Jews were an awkward people – they would not eat with Romans, bathe with Romans, nor pray with Romans, and they fomented revolution on the Eastern borders. What Rome wanted was a a Rome-friendly Judaism that preached peace and love and turning the other cheek. That is what Saul’s new sect of Simple Judaism for Gentiles (Christianity) gave them, and why Saul’s new sect was supported at the highest levels in the Roman Empire.

But what of all that persecution, you ask? Ravaged by lions in the Colosseum. Burned as torches by Nero.

Well yes, but which sect was being persecuted and tortured here? It is obvious from the later historians that it was the Desposyni who were being hunted down – the blood relatives of Jesus himself. Here was a dangerous rebel whose sect had caused the greatest disturbance on the Easter borders of the Empire – of course Nero, Vespasian et al wanted to persecute them. But Christianity? Not really. It is often said that Emperor Vespasian’s cousin became Pope Clement of Rome. Some persecution, huh?

So that is why the Catholic Church cannot and will not find their beloved Jesus in the historical record. Jesus was not the character who the Church have preached about, and so they cannot admit to him being who he really was. They do not want to find the historical Jesus, because the Catholic Church will crumble if they ever do.

Note: the entire quote is copied and pasted without font modifications. I’ve went back and linkified some of the material for reference purposes only. For more information on the early history of Christianity, might I suggest http://books.google.com/books?id=qDe…age&q=&f=false?

Permalink 2 Comments

The Jesus bloodline is alive and well today

October 1, 2009 at 12:45 pm (Christ myth theories, theories on Jesus's parents)

Yeshua Cunobeline‘s bloodline has lasted for the last 2000 years, nearly undetected from the world. We may not know a lot about Jesus’s life, but we at least know that he was once rabbi king, and kept the royal bloodline as fruitful as possible. The bloodline is still alive today in three villages known as the Kimbles, England. The church of all churches is named The Great Kimble Church, and is possibly the world’s only “true” Christian church.

The church has ties to Saint Nicholas and the Knights Templar.
View Larger Map

Permalink 2 Comments

Next page »